In a four at Fulham, his lack of pace and mobility was often exposed. That wouldn’t be as much of an issue in a three, when he could be bailed out by the more aware Vlaar and the pacier Okore.

This would also suit the left-footed Baker and Clark, who – when required to play – could patrol a tighter area than in a four, and with the support of two experienced heads around them, instead of one.

So I can see some sense in a back three of Okore-Vlaar-Senderos. The trouble is, we don’t have the players elsewhere to suit that formation.

Senderos, seen here tangling with Neymar, will play in his third World Cup in Brazil this summer (Picture: Getty Images)

Too many times, 3-5-2 becomes 5-3-2 as the wing-backs are pinned. As a result, the opposition dominate possession, resulting in panicked clearances, a bypassing of the midfield and the temptation to use a long ball as our outlet.

Matt Lowton and Joe Bennett look like they should be good wing-backs, as they get up and down, but they struggle to defend well on a consistent basis. It is here where our biggest problems lie.

Improving the protection to the centre-backs is the first step to answering our defensive crisis, not signing another one as injury-prone and mistake-prone as those we already have.

Unless a takeover goes through, though, strengthening the team is nigh on impossible. But why use some of what minimal resources we do have on another centre-back, when that is not the biggest issue we face?

Yes, Senderos is playing in his third World Cup, but he may not start Switzerland’s group stage games. Yes, he’s played for Milan and Valencia, but it’s a slower pace in Italy and Spain, which better suits him. In the cut and thrust of the Premier League – the like-for-like you can judge him on – his deficiencies have been laid bare.

I want to be proved wrong. I am never critical for the sake of it.

But let’s put it this way. Had we not signed him, would anyone say we are crying out for him?